What’s new?
Chris Gerrard responds to Chancellor's Autumn Statement
George Osborne’s Autumn Statement on Tuesday (29 November) is a low point for the cause of nature conservation. Not only did he announce a review that could undermine our most precious wildlife sites, but he has undermined his own government’s promise to be the greenest government ever and our hope that nature is really valued by politicians at Westminster.
First, a few months ago, the government announced a review of planning policy and stated its intention to reduce over 1000 pages of policy down to about 50. Nature conservation policy, mainly found in Planning Policy Statement 9 is only seven pages long and provides developers, planners and local communities useful guidance to ensure development doesn’t harm wildlife and preferably has net benefits. In the draft National Planning Policy Framework, pretty much all of this guidance has gone, replaced by wishy washy statements that leave local planners a much freer hand in policy development. As it stands there’s a real threat that important sites will be harmed, directly or indirectly. The Wildlife Trust will have to work a lot harder to maintain the levels of protection these sites deserve.
In October, Wildlife and Countryside Link, of which we are a member, released a report which assessed the government’s performance against its natural environment commitments. Out of 16 commitments only two had been met and these were for opposing commercial whaling and a ban on ivory sales. Of the remaining, seven had been partially met and seven had little progress or were shown to be wanting.
The Natural Environment White Paper, published in June, was disappointing in so far as there was not primary legislation attached to it, but contained much to be praised, supporting the findings and recommendations of ‘Making Space for Nature’. It seemed that Defra, at least, understood what we need to do to aid nature’s recovery, reflecting what we have been saying for years about Living Landscapes. Defra, conservation agencies, wildlife charities and others are united in the challenge of restoring a coherent ecological network across the country, connecting, buffering and extending sites of value for wildlife.
Then George Osborne said this:
“…And we will make sure that gold plating of EU rules on things like Habitats aren’t placing ridiculous costs on British businesses.”
With this statement the government is saying that it wants to reduce the protection afforded to our very best wildlife sites – including those that include habitats that are rare at a European Level – in order to facilitate development. Using the term gold plating is a red flag, conveying the sense that we’re unnecessarily penalising ourselves in the way we translate EU legislation into UK law.
The Habitats and Bird Directives afford strong protection for just 335 sites across the country, including 10 in our three counties such as the iconic Woodwalton Fen, Wicken Fen, Barnack Hills and Holes and, only announced this year, the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits. They are the very best places for wildlife and are protected accordingly.
The government says it wants to ensure the directives do ‘not lead to unnecessary costs and delays to development’. Who does? But it goes further, saying ‘The Government is reviewing the Directives as currently implemented in England by Budget 2012 and is committed to tackling blockages for developments where compliance is particularly complex or has large impacts.’ This sounds like policy speak for allowing damaging development and reducing the burden on the developer for compensating for the damage done. We’re all on board for properly reviewing legislation to make sure it remains fit for purpose, but this is an attempt to dismantle important safeguards for precious sites.
The statement makes clear to me that the government does not include nature in its definition of ‘green’ and that far from supporting sustainable development, it will support development even if it irreparably damages sites of the highest value. This is very sad indeed in the year that we had the National Ecosystem Assessment showing how important the natural environment was for society and the economy and the government’s own Natural Environment White Paper. Joined up government this is not.
What’s also sad is that whilst it is important to prevent damaging developments, it is possible to work with nature in development and deliver multiple benefits; for wildlife, local people, employees and the services a healthy natural environment provides us with such as pollination, soil protection and flood prevention. The Wildlife Trust has a track record in protecting sites from development and working with developers to create greater outcomes for wildlife. Take a walk round Cambourne, the new village where we have our Cambridgeshire office, and you’ll see far more wildlife now than when it was oilseed rape and winter wheat; and new reserves at Rushden in Northants, Houghton Regis in Bedfordshire, and Trumpington near Cambridge, will produce even more benefits for wildlife out of well planned development in the near future. As Stephanie Hilborne, Chief Exec of the Wildlife Trusts says: “The wrong outcome from this review risks driving a wedge between developers and conservationists at time when we ought to be co-operating more than ever.”
We will expect to be fully involved in the review and will make our views heard loud and clear.
To be kept informed keep an eye on our website, sign up to our enewsletter or follow me (@chrisgerrard) or the Trust (@wildlifebcn) on Twitter.
Read more about the threats to nature on the national Wildlife Trusts website.
Chris Gerrard
Director of Living Landscapes
Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire.